On 1/30/04 8:19 PM, Robin Gist at k4vu@bellsouth.net wrote:
>>No doubt. However, the choices for phone segments is somewhat limited.
>>Any segment given will must overlap the existing priviledges for General,
>>and these are exactly the segments where the nets have concentrated.
>
>establishment of a novice phone/image subband in the current novice segments
>on 3.5 mhz would be an excellent solution.
You would put Novices on 3.675-3.725 MHz, running phone? When I, as a 20
wpm extra, cannot operate phone there?
>>This was a convincing argument right up until the CB slang part. The CB
>>craze is long since dead, having died out almost two decades ago.
>
>the craze might be dead, but CB isn't. tune around 27 mhz anytime. it's
>all 'wall-to-wall and treetop tall'. not saying that the above would happen
>on 3.9 mhz, but...
I've tuned throught this segment in recent years. It's NOTHING like it
was back in the late 70s. Of course, neither are the ham bands....
>>Is it? As I listen to the bands during the week, they seem awfully empty
>>most nights.
>
>yes and no. the 80m novice band earlier tonight was bristling with
>activity. and -- as i recall -- some bands were dead a lot of the time 20
>years ago.
I haven't heard significant activity in the Novice bands in over a
decade. Back in the late 70s, it was moderately crowded. Today, you're
lucky to find one or two signals during the week.
>>And, if you remember, it failed miserably. The ARRL started publishing an
>>article entitled "Your Novice Accent" as a pamplet and mailing it to new
>>Novices. I still have mine, almost 30 years later.
>
>how did it fail miserably? if you're a new ham, you're a new ham. folks
>are gonna forgive you for your honest faux paus, and help you along. i
>think that might be what the article was all about. a 'novice accent' was
>just that -- it was nothing to be ashamed of, or use to consider the entire
>thing a failure.
You gotta read the pamplet, it makes its own case. Go Google on "Your
Novice Accent" and you'll find it.
>>The problem was, the newcomers copied each other's bad habits,
>>reinforcing them rather than learning proper operating procedures from
>>more experienced operators. Making Novice ghettos was a huge mistake. The
>>Novice license might have been more successful, had Novices intermingled
>>with more experienced operators.
>
>i disagree again.
You can disagree all you want, but it is a fact. This phenomenon started
from the moment the Novice bands were established.
>i have a logbook full of upperclass contacts from my
>novice days on 40 and 15. in fact, i'd say the majority of my qso's were
>with upperclass licensees. i would consider the novice program in the 70s a
>huge success.
In the 70s, yes. But I also remember that we had bad habits on the novice
bands that weren't reflected in the other band segments when I upgraded
to General.
It's more than two decades later.
>guess folks just weren't as snobby back then. i would have
>never referred to the activity from 7100-7150 and 21100-21200 a 'ghetto'.
It's a ghetto in the fact that there was limited interaction with higher
class licensees. It was segregated.
>it was nothing but exciting to me -- and many folks i talk with who got
>their tickets at that time also consider something of a 'magical'
>experience. in fact, i can still remember my first QSO (WA4CNY -- a
>general -- 40m CW, 22 Aug 78) and my first JA (JJ1KHZ -- on 15 Jan 1979, 15m
>CW). ghetto? it was dreamland.
You misunderstood. I NEVER said that it wasn't fun.
>i agree, but i think i'd leave it up to the old-timer to decide whether or
>not he/she wants to be the teacher. some of those folks on 75 ssb rather
>talk about their weedeaters and new concrete driveways with their usual
>buddies.
They can, provided they don't cause harmful interference to other
operators.
>watching the cluster, it looks like most dx on 75 hangs out around 3790+.
>and just because they upgrade doesn't mean they give up the space -- in
>fact, that would answer your issue about novices being left to themselves.
So, you'd remove 50 kHz of digital communications bandwidth from 80m, 40m
and 100 kHz from 15m? I'm sure there's a bunch of operators that will be
very upset about that.
>and why not move them to the novice bands? the novice bands have been there
>all along and no one has complained about it so far. keep the power limits
>down for any license class using that portion and let it rip. by putting
>'em up on 3950, it is just asking for a turf-war based on license class.
I suppose I give hams a lot more credit -- that they can work things into
an amicable arrangement.
>sorry bill -- absolutely nothing personal at all about this -- but i just
>have a problem with this 'ham radio is dying so we have to bargain price it'
>stuff.
I can understand that fully.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
|